Introduction
One of the most striking features of Turkey’s contemporary authoritarianism is that it has not been sustained by political actors alone. Religious communities (cemaatler), once celebrated for providing spiritual resilience against the state’s coercive policies, have increasingly lent legitimacy to a regime that has abandoned law, justice, and conscience in favour of power consolidation. Among these communities, the Risale-i Nur students (Nur talebeleri) occupy a singular place. They claim inheritance of Bediüzzaman Said Nursî’s call for “istikamet” (steadfastness in truth), yet a significant portion of them have become passive – sometimes even willing – partners of a political order that operates as a mafia-like network of interests rather than a constitutional state.
This article examines how sections of the Risale-i Nur movement failed their historical and moral test under Turkey’s electoral authoritarian regime. It argues that their silence, complicity, and at times active dissemination of delegitimising narratives against the Gülen Movement played a crucial role in normalising oppression. The article also contrasts today’s passivity with earlier generations of Nur students such as Binbaşı (Major) Âsım, remembered as an “Istikamet Martyr.”
Historical Background: The Nur Movement and Political Authority
For much of the twentieth century, Turkey’s religious communities, including the Nur movement, functioned as civil breathing spaces against state repression. The Risale-i Nur, authored by Bediüzzaman Said Nursî (1877–1960), offered a Qur’an-centred theology of faith (iman hizmeti) that opposed both militant secularism and the instrumentalisation of religion by power.
Nursî’s followers often endured imprisonment, exile, and harassment. Their collective memory was forged in opposition to coercive state structures. Yet, as Turkey’s political landscape shifted in the early twenty-first century, many Nur students entered a different relationship with power. Benefiting from educational, bureaucratic, and financial openings under the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), they gradually lost their critical stance. By the 2010s, parts of the Nur community no longer stood against authoritarian drift but became complicit in it.
Silence and Complicity of the Risale-i Nur Students
The most visible manifestation of this complicity emerged after 2016, when the Gülen Movement – historically connected to Nur teachings – was subjected to massive repression. The state’s narrative portrayed the movement as a foreign-controlled conspiracy, allegedly directed by Western intelligence services. Strikingly, these narratives were not only amplified by government propaganda but also circulated within Nur communities themselves.
Rumours that Fethullah Gülen had become “a prisoner of the CIA” or “surrounded by foreign agents” were spread by figures once close to him. This rhetoric lent credibility to the regime’s narrative among ordinary citizens. In popular perception, the discrediting of Gülen was far more persuasive when it came from Nur students, who were seen as insiders. Thus, the Nur community’s silence and gossip did not merely represent moral failure but became an active ingredient of authoritarian consolidation.
Case Studies: Political Prisoners and Nur Students’ Inaction
The moral test deepens when one considers the fate of prominent elderly figures targeted by the regime.
İlhan İşbilen, a former parliamentarian, collapsed during a court session due to health complications but was returned to prison rather than released on humanitarian grounds (TR724, 2025).
Alaaddin Kaya, once a businessman close to political leaders, faced charges despite advanced age and severe illness (TR724, 2025).
Kazım Avcı, along with others such as Mehmet Karaca, received aggravated life sentences after courts resisted even the Supreme Court of Appeals’ reversal (TR724, 2025).
These individuals were well known to senior Nur students, many of whom had previously shared platforms and causes with them. Yet the Nur community, with few exceptions, remained silent. Women incarcerated with infants, teachers forced into exile, and the elderly denied medical treatment all endured without meaningful support from those who claimed the moral heritage of Nursî.
This silence not only betrayed interpersonal loyalty but also contradicted the Islamic injunction to oppose zulüm (injustice). By failing to speak out, the Nur community indirectly strengthened the authoritarian regime’s hand.
The Contrast of Binbaşı Âsım and Contemporary Nur Leaders
The sharpest contrast can be seen in the story of Binbaşı Âsım, one of Nursî’s earliest disciples. Arrested during the 1930s while copying and distributing the Risale-i Nur, he faced interrogation that forced an impossible choice: to tell the truth and endanger his teacher, or to lie and compromise his honour. Choosing neither, he prayed for death and surrendered his soul, earning the title of “İstikamet Martyr” (Atıcı, 2025).
His sacrifice epitomises steadfastness: preferring honourable death to complicity. By comparison, many contemporary Nur leaders accepted comfort, family privilege, or material benefits in exchange for silence. Where Binbaşı Âsım embraced martyrdom for truth, today’s elders embraced quietism for convenience. The trajectory from “istikamet şehitliği” to “istikamet suskunluğu” (silence of steadfastness) is one of the greatest moral reversals in Turkey’s religious history.
Cemaat Support and Electoral Authoritarianism
Authoritarian regimes endure not only through coercion but through the symbolic capital of religious legitimacy. The AKP skilfully distributed resources and status to cemaatler, thereby ensuring their acquiescence. Groups such as the Menzil order, Hakyol, and branches of the Nur movement functioned as moral props of the regime.
By appearing alongside state officials, receiving public contracts, and refraining from critique, these communities normalised authoritarian practices in the eyes of millions of pious citizens. The very movement that once resisted secular authoritarianism became a pillar of Islamist authoritarianism. This demonstrates how electoral authoritarianism in Turkey has relied not only on party loyalty but on the neutralisation and co-optation of religious civil society.
Conclusion
The ordeal of the Risale-i Nur students illustrates how moral inheritance can be squandered. The generation that once endured prisons and exile under Nursî’s guidance left behind a legacy of resistance to oppression. Yet their successors, faced with an authoritarian regime, largely failed to uphold that legacy.
By spreading rumours against the Gülen Movement, ignoring political prisoners, and providing tacit support to authoritarian rule, many Nur students transformed themselves from potential defenders of justice into accomplices of oppression. The juxtaposition is stark: Binbaşı Âsım’s honourable death versus contemporary elders’ comfortable silence.
Ultimately, Turkey’s electoral authoritarianism has thrived not only because of political manipulation but because of religious communities’ complicity. History will not record the Nur students as steadfast inheritors of Nursî’s mission, but as those who abandoned the oppressed to preserve their own privileges.
References
Atıcı, R. (2025). İstikamet Şehidi Binbaşı Âsım Bey ve “Tarihî Tekerrürler Devr-i Dâimi”. Çağlayan Dergisi, 1 September 2025.
TR724. (2025). Duruşmada fenalaşan eski AKP milletvekili İlhan İşbilen hastaneye kaldırıldı. Retrieved from https://www.tr724.com/durusmada-fenalasan-eski-akp-milletvekili-ilhan-isbilen-hastaneye-kaldirildi/
TR724. (2025). Erbakan’la parti kurdu, Erdoğan’la aynı masada nikah şahitliği yaptı: İş insanı Alaeddin Kaya şimdi neyle suçlanıyor? Retrieved from https://www.tr724.com/erbakanla-parti-kurdu-erdoganla-ayni-masada-nikah-sahitligi-yapti-is-insani-alaeddin-kaya-simdi-neyle-suclaniyor/
TR724. (2025). Mahkeme Yargıtay’ın bozma kararına direndi: Karaca, İşbilen, Kaya ve Avcı’ya yeniden ağırlaştırılmış müebbet. Retrieved from https://www.tr724.com/mahkeme-yargitayin-bozma-kararina-direndi-karaca-isbilen-kaya-ve-avciya-yeniden-agirlastirilmis-muebbet/
Gözaydın, İ. (2019). Religion, identity and politics in Turkey: The rise of the Menzil Community. Turkish Studies, 20(4), 510–528.
Gümüşçü, Ş. (2023). Authoritarianism, repression, and resistance: Islam and politics in Turkey after the coup attempt. Middle East Critique, 32(1), 5–25.
Kuru, A. T. (2019). Islam, authoritarianism, and underdevelopment: A global and historical comparison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Levitsky, S., & Way, L. (2010). Competitive authoritarianism: Hybrid regimes after the Cold War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yavuz, H. (2020). Islam, populism and regime change in Turkey: Making and unmaking of the AKP. Routledge.
